About your Search

20140226
20140306
STATION
CSPAN 1
DATE
LANGUAGE
Search Results 0 to 0 of about 1
that massachusetts came out, this court decided environmental defense versus duke which decided -- even when a defined term is construed a particular way, it doesn't mean the same term can be construed differently where context requires. that is why massachusetts, after indeed holding that the definition of pollutant included greenhouse gases, didn't go there -- stop there. it asked whether applying it to the title ii provisions on motor vehicles would yield extreme measures or counterintuitive results. only then did they direct the epa to apply the definition. they understood that the literal definition of pollutant was sufficiently broad that it should not be applied without some additional analysis of the context of the provisions. >> what else does it cover other than the -- mobile vehicles? >> there are multiple places where it appears in the act. they have interpreted the words, any air pollutant to mean any subset of the pollutants that this definition -- >> that is because the section that it is in is a different definition directly. >> that is not correct. in the pstn title v provis
Search Results 0 to 0 of about 1